Further Conference Expansion Talk

[A-Tex Devil]

Feel free to merge with old thread, but it's in the dust, I think. But since the main page has posted several links on it, I thought I'd kick up another discussion.

The "4 conferences of 16" talk is heating up. What this is really going to do is create 8 defacto 8 team sub-conferences/divisions, but each pair of sub-conferences will be tied together through a championship game/tournament/etc. Think of it like 4 mini MLBs prior to expansion to 3 divisions.

The scary talk is the potential for these 64 schools (basically, the BCS schools and Notre Dame, kicking out Cincy, and one of the triumverate of USF, Baylor and Iowa State) creating a tournament to compete with/replace the NCAA basketball tourney in much the same way the NCAA once took on the NIT.

[Duvall]

The "4 conferences of 16" talk is heating up. What this is really going to do is create 8 defacto 8 team sub-conferences/divisions, but each pair of sub-conferences will be tied together through a championship game/tournament/etc.

ACC North: Boston College, Syracuse, UConn, Pitt, West Virginia, Virginia Tech, Miami, Florida State.
ACC South: Maryland, Virginia, North Carolina, North Carolina State, Wake Forest, Duke, Clemson, Georgia Tech.

I could live with that.

[Tappan Zee Devil]

ACC North: Boston College, Syracuse, UConn, Pitt, West Virginia, Virginia Tech, Miami, Florida State.
ACC South: Maryland, Virginia, North Carolina, North Carolina State, Wake Forest, Duke, Clemson, Georgia Tech.

I could live with that.

I know your intent is to put the old "real" ACC in one division. But politically, I think you will need put Virginia and Virginia Tech together.

so probably Virginia and Maryland go with the north and Miami and Florida State with the south.

Although I like your divisions better.

Jim

[uh_no]

unsubstantiated claims ftw

[wilko]

I was never a fan of expansion for FBall.

If we do it, we do it to strengthen our core competency which is BBall.
Add Syracuse, UConn, Louisville and Georgetown.

Overload the conf in BBall heavy schools so that we are THE ONLY East coast option for a TV network carrying an interesting game.

[wva_iron_duke]

Georgetown doesn't fit due to no football. Try WVU.

[Duvall]

Georgetown doesn't fit due to no football. Try WVU.

WVU doesn't fit due to fit. Then again, neither does Louisville.

[sagegrouse]

Georgetown doesn't fit due to no football. Try WVU.

I don't know what Georgetown's long-range plans are, but in the past twenty years it has moved from club football to Div III NCAA football to Div I-AA.

Others are probably more up-to-date than this part-time DC resident.

sagegrouse

[4decadedukie]

Georgetown doesn't fit due to no football. Try WVU.

Well, actually, I believe Georgetown plays intercollegiate football, although not Division I. I doubt if on-campus space at Georgetown could accommodate an even Wade-sized stadium (plus parking, etc.), however, RFK (easy student access via Metro) and/or FedEx Field (high-revenue sky boxes and all the latest accouterments) have adequate seating .

[A-Tex Devil]

unsubstantiated claims ftw

Well the commissioners and ADs are giving sound bites so it's not completely unsubstantiated. The Big East is scared enough to bring in Paul Tagliabue. Things are on the table at the BCS meetings this week (regardless of the spin they are giving ). What those details are, I am not sure.

If the Big Ten just raids the Big East, maybe that's all that happens.

But like DBR says, the Big XII is key. If you pull any piece out of the Big XII Jenga tower, it's all falling down. There are no teams attractive enough to add to replace a Mizzou or Colorado should they leave for the Big Ten or Pac Tec respectively. Don't tell me TCU or Boise St. or the Utah schools. Boise St.'s total student grad rate is worse than most FBS football teams. They are not getting in the BCS. TCU brings nothing new to the Big XII table except a decent football team who can't sell out its home stadium. Utah or BYU would be a half-I'm a real wanker for saying this.I'm a real wanker for saying this.I'm a real wanker for saying this.I'm a real wanker for saying this.I'm a real wanker for saying this. replacement in terms of academics and overall athletics to CU.

If Mizzou or CU leave. Texas will be hot on their heels and can pretty much pick between the Big Ten or Pac Ten. Texas and the Big Ten are saying now they aren't interested in each other, but that's like Mike Shanahan saying he is going to take a QB with the 5th pick tonight. It's posturing. If Mizzou or CU leave, Texas will be gone within 12 months.

[Chicago 1995]

Well the commissioners and ADs are giving sound bites so it's not completely unsubstantiated. The Big East is scared enough to bring in Paul Tagliabue. Things are on the table at the BCS meetings this week (regardless of the spin they are giving ). What those details are, I am not sure.

If the Big Ten just raids the Big East, maybe that's all that happens.

But like DBR says, the Big XII is key. If you pull any piece out of the Big XII Jenga tower, it's all falling down. There are no teams attractive enough to add to replace a Mizzou or Colorado should they leave for the Big Ten or Pac Tec respectively. Don't tell me TCU or Boise St. or the Utah schools. Boise St.'s total student grad rate is worse than most FBS football teams. They are not getting in the BCS. TCU brings nothing new to the Big XII table except a decent football team who can't sell out its home stadium. Utah or BYU would be a half-I'm a real wanker for saying this.I'm a real wanker for saying this.I'm a real wanker for saying this.I'm a real wanker for saying this.I'm a real wanker for saying this. replacement in terms of academics and overall athletics to CU.

If Mizzou or CU leave. Texas will be hot on their heels and can pretty much pick between the Big Ten or Pac Ten. Texas and the Big Ten are saying now they aren't interested in each other, but that's like Mike Shanahan saying he is going to take a QB with the 5th pick tonight. It's posturing. If Mizzou or CU leave, Texas will be gone within 12 months.

The SEC is rumbling about not being left behind. Do they make a play to move from 12 to 16 by adding Texas/TAMU/Oklahoma/Oklahoma State?

Or do they try to raid the ACC and lock up Florida with Miami and FSU?

[jimsumner]

If the ACC is going to expand, go all the way to 16.

Is there a way to do this and maintain some rational geographic divisions?

Right now, the ACC has three distinct geographic divisions.

The South is Clemson, GT, FSU and Miami.

Then there's the Big Four.

North of the Big Four are Virginia, VT, Maryland and BC.

We all want to keep the Big Four together.

So, you add four teams north of NC and have a N/S split, with the NC teams in the South. If the BE is cannabilzed, this might be possible, especially if the ACC can go outside the BE for someone like Temple.

Or, you add four teams south of NC and put the Big Four in the northern part of the N/S split. This would be tougher. South Florida and Central Florida would work but where do the other two come from? Other Florida schools? Can South Carolina be lured from the SEC? Not likely. ECU would love an invite from the ACC but they would have to be decoupled from the Big Four and besides, the ACC already owns North Carolina.

So, going north makes more sense, especially if the ACC can get into big media markets like NYC or Philly. Then again, those are pro cities.

Then again, again, if the SEC raids the ACC, the ACC would have to work just to get back to twelve. BTW, I've always thought Vanderbilt belonged more in the ACC then the SEC. Trade? For whom?

I'm not sure any of this comes to pass. Then again, I still miss the SWC, in the same way that I miss that rabid dog down the street.

So, we'll see.

[A-Tex Devil]

The SEC is rumbling about not being left behind. Do they make a play to move from 12 to 16 by adding Texas/TAMU/Oklahoma/Oklahoma State?

Or do they try to raid the ACC and lock up Florida with Miami and FSU?

I won't say that Texas would NEVER go to the SEC, but Texas would ALMOST never go to the SEC. It would be a last resort (much like the Big XII was). Texas is despised by the other Big XII schools because part of the deal for coming in 15 years ago was that the academic standards had to be raised. No more Prop 40-whatever students. The SEC doesn't have the same entry requirements that Texas has required of the Big XII. Other than geography, Texas is a much better fit with the ACC in terms of institutions than the SEC.

And even though the geography is worse, Texas would much rather raid CA recruiting or Midwest recruiting and risk reciprocal in state recruiting losses than it would have those same battles with the LSUs, Bamas, Floridas of the world.

[OldPhiKap]

Why don't we just pick up four PAC-10 teams, and change our name to the "Both Coasts Conference?"

Great for football, bad for basketball. Just like the last time.

[PumpkinFunk]

The problem that I see with expansion for football is that it doesn't help the problem, it worsens it, I feel. Going to 4 16-team conferences with a 4-team playoff doesn't help the issue if people think that 2 teams from the same conference are still the best team. For football, you have an 8-game conference schedule where you play 7 games within your division of the conference and a rotating partner that might as well not be in the same conference for all intents and purposes. For basketball, you get the type of schedule bastardization that the Big East does, with woefully unbalanced schedules. The bottom line is that for basketball, this is far, far worse (which I think would cause the majority of the ACC to want to stay - we're a basketball league who has slowly strengthening football, not a football league with great basketball) and even though the NCAAT is the bottom line, it still would be shocking to see the ACC expand or get raided by the SEC.

My guess is that the Pac-10 and Big Ten destroy the Big East and Big XII (Pitt, Rutgers, Mizzou to Big Ten, Colorado to Pac 10, maybe Notre Dame to the Big Ten), leaving the pieces on the ground while the SEC and ACC don't pick them all up. The SEC is the top football league. The ACC is the top basketball league. Neither wants to dilute that, unless the SEC can pull Texas somehow, or unless the ACC can pull Syracuse, Georgetown, and some other strong basketball schools with (maybe) I-A football and strong academics. That doesn't seem likely to me.

Much like the Big Ten, academics are an important consideration for the ACC. We're not going to take Louisville or West Virginia or UConn. If we do, it's just not the ACC anymore.

[bluedevil2012]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=31g0YE61PLQ

[jimsumner]

"We're not going to take Louisville or West Virginia or UConn. If we do, it's just not the ACC anymore. "

Some would say the ACC hasn't been the ACC for some time now. Horses, barn doors and all that.

Are West Virginia and UConn any further down the academic pecking order than FSU?

[hurleyfor3]

Some would say the ACC hasn't been the ACC for some time now. Horses, barn doors and all that.

I get your gist, and agree with you in a top-to-bottom sense, but check out how many of the last 10 basketball titles were won by ACC schools. I'm not aware of another 5/10 run by any conference, ever, that didn't involve ucla.

[4decadedukie]

Is anyone else troubled by additional ACC expansion, especially with more "thuggish" Big East schools? I see very significant cultural and academic differences between universities like Pitt, UConn, WVU, and so on -- or even with Miami, FSU, Virginia Tech -- and with Duke, UNC, UVa, Wake, etc.

Many believe the ACC's recent expansion (Miami, Virginia Tech and then BC) and its next-to-last expansion (FSU) were mistakes that have not even achieved alleged financial promises -- and please consider, the most-reputable ACC universities (Duke, UNC and UVa) opposed the more-recent change (with UVa eventually strong-armed to accede by Virginia politicians, who wanted to have VPI added to the ACC). We should remember that expansions/consolidations of this sort will include ALL intercollegiate athletics, not just the traditional, major revenue sports (men's football and basketball).

If one wants Duke to have excellent competition and cultural/academic compatibility for all sports, why not consider a sixteen-team Atlantic conference (no longer the ACC) that melds the best of the Ivy League -- currently unmentioned in all the uber-expansion chatter -- the ACC, and a few others, such as:
Duke
UNC
UVa
BC
Wake
Syracuse
Notre Dame (a long-shot, but this whole proposal is mighty theoretical)
Army
Navy
Cornell
Dartmouth
Yale
Harvard
Penn
Princeton
Brown

Or one could have great academic and cultural similarity, if geographic parameters (and travel costs) were increased, with Atlantic and Pacific Divisions (such as):
Duke
UNC
UVa
BC
Wake
Syracuse
Army
Navy

Stanford
Northwestern
Air Force
Rice
Tulane
TCU
Vanderbilt
Notre Dame

[jimsumner]

There's a reason why nobody is talking about the Ivies. They gave up big-time football two generations ago and I can't imagine they're interested in coming back.

This whole thing is driven by football and money, an unholy alliance all too often. I don't think Option Two has enough football power to make it work. Like it or not, large state universities control college football and a conference without a fair number of those likely will be driven into something approaching irrelevance.